Comment 11 for bug 557585

Anatoly, thanks for fixing this bug on Windows. Please feel free to send your fixes to Jelmer. Unfortunately, I don't have the resources, and I don't think Jelmer does either, to test every change thoroughly on Windows. I'll try to do better in the future, but without something much more automated and comprehensive I don't think we'll be able to catch all of these things ahead of time.

The specific locking protocol I implemented in GitFile (exclusive lockfiles named foo.lock, atomic renames) is the same as the one used by cgit. Among other things, this means that repositories following this protocol can be accessed concurrently by dulwich and cgit, which IMHO is a Good Thing. I would argue against full-repository locking because that's very incompatible with cgit. (That said, cgit has notoriously poor support for both Windows and networked filesystems, so if we find something that performs better on those systems, we should suggest it to the cgit folks as well.)

Now, about the Google copyright. All of the code I've contributed to dulwich has been in the course of my day job at Google. According to corporate policy (and I'm pretty sure US copyright law, but don't quote me on that), that mean Google owns the copyright. So, instead of writing "Copyright 2010 David Borowitz," I have to say "Copyright 2010 Google, Inc." The code was still written by me either way.

To make sure Google "gets" any patches you submit, just make sure they're submitted to the master repo on samba.org; I'm always working as close to HEAD as possible.